Dear Reader,
Apparently my hosting provider hijacked the blog and sent all my traffic to some scam/spam site. Please be patient while I recover the site over the next few days.
In other news, stay the hell away from NoAdsFree.com. It’s a scam.
-KW
Dear Reader,
Apparently my hosting provider hijacked the blog and sent all my traffic to some scam/spam site. Please be patient while I recover the site over the next few days.
In other news, stay the hell away from NoAdsFree.com. It’s a scam.
-KW
Tagged: administration | No comments yet
Dear Reader,
My apologies for the recent downtime of the War on Bullshit blog. The traffic from my last post (12 Bonehead Misconceptions of Computer Science Professors) blew my bandwidth allocation and I didn’t notice until yesterday (thanks Michelle!). Just my luck that one of my posts would get popular just when I’m ignoring my blog to focus on job hunting.
Many thanks, as always, for reading. I’ll be back in the New Year with brand new stuff.
Tagged: administration | No comments yet
Dear Readers,
I have not been updating lately due to some important projects that have been consuming all of my time. I believe it best, at this point, to stop pretending I’m going to get a post up any time now.
I’ll be back to my regular schedule starting the second week of January. Until then, best wishes and happy holidays.
No tags for this post. 1 comment so far
The poster-child for what’s wrong with postsecondary education is the computer science program. Despite the enormous need for competent programmers, database administrators, systems administrators, IT specialists and a host of other technical professionals, computer science programs seem to explicitly ignore the professional skills of which western society has growing deficiency and proceed with materials and teaching styles that are outdated, ineffective, useless and just plain wrong. This is due to the absurd misconceptions held by computer science faculty members across many universities.
I have personally met computer science professors who believe each of the following things. I make no claims as to how widespread these beliefs are; you can judge that for yourself.
I don’t know how many computer science programs start teaching programming using Java, but there are more than a few, and that’s too many. When you’re going over variables, loops and conditionals, the object-oriented overhead of a language like java is unnecessary and confusing. Inquisitive students can’t just memorize things (i.e. public static void main (String args[])) without demanding to know what it means and why it’s there.
Comp Sci people seem to be terribly confused about what ‘basic’ means. When one learns to drive a car, starting the car, making a right turn, a left turn, parking, etc. is basic. Building a parallel gas-electric hybrid engine is not basic. Driving a car is more basic than building one because the latter requires significantly more expert knowledge than the former. In the same way, using a simple scripting language requires less depth of understanding that writing in machine language; therefore, computer science education should start with higher level languages and proceed to lower level ones, not vice versa.
Writing code by hand is stupid. It is entirely inconsistent with the interactive and iterative design process that comes naturally to hackers and painters alike. Professional software developers make extensive use of API documentation, reference guides, forum discussions, etc. to make troubleshoot problems and make their code more efficient and effective. Writing code by hand tests your ability to write trivially simple software without making errors. Real programmers must be capable of making complex software and detecting their errors with a variety of automated tools. Teaching or testing coding using pencil and paper is inconsistent with both the natural mode of human action and the practical realities of software development.
Programming is like algebra. You can’t learn how to write code by watching someone write code on a blackboard or listening to elaborate explanations from professors. You can’t learn math from watching someone do math. You learn to do things by doing them.
Designing algorithms is about finding innovative solutions to difficult problems. Algorithm design courses are about studying existing solutions to rather simple problems. Learning how a particular problem can be solves provides approximately zero insight into how to solve problems you’ve never encountered before.
There’s this crazy belief among Comp Sci. faculty that all languages are basically the same, so after learning the principles behind languages you can use whatever. This is bullshit. This is like claiming that since someone studied Spannish grammar in grade school, they can speak Spanish fluently, in any of Spanish, Mexican or Columbian accents. The leap between structured and object-oriented programming is huge, and it pales in comparison to the leap between object-oriented languages and declarative languages.
Teams of professional programmers spends months and years building intricate software systems in response to poorly-understood, ill-defined and changing problems. To accomplish this, they employ API documentation, online tutorials and forum discussions, team problem-solving sessions, reference books and an infinite number of phone-a-friend lifelines. Exams test your ability to write simple code to solve a trivial, well-defined static problems, without consulting and references. One is about resourcefulness, the other about memory. Exams test the wrong thing.
At the university where I did my undergrad, it was easy to finish a B.Sc. in computer science without ever building a graphical interface. While I agree that many software projects do not have graphical components (e.g., developer APIs), to marginalize GUIs as some kind of specialty endeavor is short-bus crazy!
I have been told that development involving sophisticated work with graphics and animation involves calculus. Outside of this particular subfield, however, I haven’t seen much calculus in software development. Certainly I’ve seen a lot more GUI development than graphics.
Comp. Sci. profs have been saying this for years. Hasn’t happened. And it’s not going to happen until Ubuntu and company take the dicking around out of computing the way Apple has.
Yes, believe it or not, a computer science prof said this during one of my classes in undergrad. It goes directly to a deeper misunderstanding among Comp. Sci. academics that power and control are the primary factors driving adoption. They’re not. Simplicity and ease of use are far more important.
The same idiot who thought LaTeX was the future also told his class to go buy gates (the things transistors are made of) at RadioShack and play with them to see how they work. Again, this evidences how completely out of touch some of these people are. Gates are microscopic. You can’t go buy them at an electronics store.
I have long argued that society needs a professional certification for software developers and that universities need undergraduate programs dedicated to training people for these certifications. It’s worked for accounting, engineering and medicine. There’s no reason it can’t work for software development. One of the primary barriers to this sort of progress is the raging incompetence of academics in computer science, computer engineering, management information systems and related disciplines.
Have one or a few to add? Comment away.
Related Posts
Why on Earth do Business Schools Teach Microsoft Access?
Abolish Universities?
Nine Reasons why Bad Grades Don’t Mean Squat
Tagged: education, list | 56 comments
Last week, U.S. President Barrack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. Right-wing pundits predictably attacked him for it. Left-wing pundits predictably then attacked the right-wing pundits for it. But that’s not the story.
The Nobel Peace Prize is one of five prizes bequeathed by Alfred Nobel. In his will, it said that the Peace Prize should be awarded to the person who “during the preceding year [...] shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” In this case, the “preceding year” is 2008.
Obama was inaugurated as U.S. President on January 20th, 2009. Read more »
Tagged: essay, politics | No comments yet
You would think that a fitness center, of all places, would be exempt from the lethargic malaise that pervades western society. In most cases, you would be mistaken. The modern gym is a plague upon fitness. That’s right, the very place we go to improve our health is practically custom-made to prevent us from exercising effectively. Here are five things that are horribly wrong with most modern gyms, and how to fix them.
Tagged: health, list | 2 comments
You know a conversation is headed sideways when the topic turns to morals and ethics. For any major social issue of our time – gay marriage, women’s reproductive rights, freedom of speech, religion in public schools, even climate change – you can find normally reasonable people who reach contradictory conclusions on the ethical choice. In this post, I explain six reasons for this moral confusion.
Most people seem to think of morality as simply Read more »
Tagged: ethics, list | 6 comments
A typical modern gym houses hundreds of individual pieces of exercise equipment, some of which appear purposefully designed to injure as many trainees as possible. Here are ten of the most dangerous exercise machines. Avoid these, and avoid any so-called personal trainer who recommends them.

A smith machine is just a bar built into an apparatus that restricts the bar to a vertical path, and sometimes prevents it from tipping sideways. Smith machines are dangerous because they lock the lifter into a vertical or near-vertical straight-line bar path. The smith machine can be safely used for short range-of-motion exercises such as shrugs and calf raises, where the natural bar path is close to vertical. However, for any compound lift such as a bench press, overhead press, squat or deadlift, the natural bar path is not a straight line. By interfering with your natural (and optimal!) movement, the smith machine increases the stress on your joints and stabilizer muscles. I tore ligaments in both my shoulders using a smith machine for overhead presses.

As you extend your leg into the locked-knee position, your shin bone rotates slightly. Leg extension machines interfere with this rotation. This puts unnecessary stress on the knee joint and can cause the knee cap to grind against the femur. Moreover, the quadriceps evolved to assist in running and jumping movements, not to provide torque against a rotating force.

Doing dumbbell laterals with your arms straight (but not locked) is reasonably safe and beneficial exercise. However, bending your arms, as this machine forces you to do, dramatically increases the stress on your rotator cuff and can lead to tears. The small muscles and tendons comprising the rotator cuff heal slowly and are difficult to rehabilitate.

Rows are a great exercise; however, rowing machines almost always suffer from the same problem. At the beginning of the exercise, you have to reach so far forward to grasp the handles that you inevitably overextend your lower back. This can damage your spine, the nerve cluster in your lower back, and your spinal erectors (the small muscles that hold your lower back straight. These are the sorts of injuries that don’t get better.
Suggestion: use a piece of chain and carabiners to bring the handles closer to you, or get someone to pull down on the cable so you can get into position safely.

The thing about ergonomics is that it has to be personalized to your body. These so-called ergonomic benches make assumptions about your height, weight, proportions, limb length, etc. Unless your body happens to fit these (often restrictive) assumptions, you’re out of luck. I can feel the benches in the above picture interfering with my shoulder movement. They also encourage taller people to move too close to the uprights (thus press to linearly) and encourage shorter people to move too far away from the uprights (thus endangering the shoulder in the initial lift). All of this serves to corrupt one’s pressing motion and endanger the shoulders, elbows and wrists.

This sort of pec deck puts your shoulders in the inner dislocation position and can tear the shoulder ligaments or the rotator cuff.

The spine is not meant to twist. Twisting the spine can damage the disks between your vertebrae. The kind of spinal twists they do in Yoga (slow, controlled stretches) are probably ok, but twisting against resistance encourages a faster and more violent movement that’s significantly more dangerous.

Crunches do stimulate growth in the rectus abdominis (the six-pack); however, the full crunching your abs also full flexes your spinal erectors, putting maximum pressure on your lower back. Over time, this damages the disks in your back. Besides, most people’s abs are invisible not because they’re ill-developed but because their percentage body fat is too high. If you want your abs to show, hit the treadmill, not the crunch machine.
Suggestion: Composite exercises such as squats and pushups work your abs the way they were intended to work – as stabilizers. If you must do an ab-specific exercise, try the plank position.

The calf is a very strong muscle. Working both calves at the same time on a standing calf raise can involve hundreds of pounds in a normal person, and over 1000 lbs. in a very strong person. This kind of weight compresses the spine, breaks blood vessels in the shoulders, and generally puts a lot of strain on joints. Standing calf raise machines often encourage this sort of practice because they often come with signs showing a two-leg movement.
Suggestion: Do calf raises one leg at a time. Hold a dumbbell in one hand and a post to keep you steady in the other.

The decline bench is a shoulder-wrecker if there ever was one. Pressing on a decline bench puts extreme pressure on the shoulder joint and surrounding stabilizer muscles, meanwhile making it nearly impossible to press the weight in the natural back-toward-your-head arc. The slant of the board encourages the lifter to push from the shoulder instead of the chest, and to let the shoulders ride “up” (toward the head) when they should be rotating “down” and back (toward the feet). The decline bench is just an exercise clusterfuck. It’s biomechanical voodoo. Don’t use it.
Suggestion: If you must work specifically on your lower pecs, try a parallel bar dip. However, avoid an extreme range of motion (dropping past the point where your upper arms are parallel to the ground) or this too will put exaggerated stresses on the shoulder. (Note: never do dips behind your back – these endanger the rotator cuff.)
If you’ve used one of the machines profiled above for years without injury, consider yourself lucky it hasn’t hurt you yet and quit now! Yes, smoking hasn’t killed you yet either, but that doesn’t mean you should keep doing it. I am not a doctor; check with yours before starting a new workout program. Don’t just switch to free weights if you have no idea what you’re doing. Find a good book on weight training (The Insider’s Tell-All Handbook on Weight Training Technique, for example) and read it before you beat yourself up.
BS Forms of Exercise and their Athletic Alternatives
Gain 34 lbs of Muscle in 28 Days – How? Double Leg Amputation?
Tagged: health, list | 5 comments
The golden rule, AKA The Ethic of Reciprocity is at the very heart of Christian thinking. (Not that Christians actually practice it, but that’s a rant for another time). However, “do to others what you would like to be done to you” suffers from an obvious logical flaw: not everyone wants to be treated the same way! Here are six situations where treating others the way you’d like to be treated is a recipe for disaster.
Suppose one day I lost my shit and murdered someone. If, shortly after, I realized that this was a terrible mistake and was sorry, I would like to be forgiven, given a warm hug and let go. I suspect most criminals would appreciate the same treatment. You may think that you would want to be thrown in prison if you broke the law, but if you do, I suspect that you’ve never seen the inside of a federal prison. In North Korea. Empathy is crucial to our justice system, but basing the prosecution of criminals entirely on the Golden Rule would be disastrous.
Some people want to hang on to every last moment of life, no matter what the cost. Other people are terrified of becoming a vegetable, losing their independence in old age, the pain of dying slowly, or the indignity of losing their minds. Asking the family of a suffering person ‘what should be done?’ is ripe for golden-rule-failure. It’s not about what the family wants. It’s about the individual. If every day hurts, you should have the option to end those days, if you so choose.
On a different note, remember the guys in high school who always wanted to play rough? And did so, regardless of who else was on the field/court/etc.? Were you one of those guys? I believe their logic (if you could call it that) went something like ‘Sports are SUPPOSED to be rough, so that’s how I’ll play.’ Except not everyone likes to play rough. Forcing your style on unwilling partners is just as bad as facing your bullshit beliefs on unwilling atheists (more on this below).
Well-meaning (albeit ignorant) parents of out or suspected gay and lesbian children sometimes want to “cure” them because they think of homosexuality as a disease. I’ve never met a gay person who wanted to be so cured. Sending potentially gay youths, or anyone else for that matter, to Jesus Camp for rehab is more likely to instil mental disease than change sexual orientation. Going to one of these anti-gay camps would be an zealous assault on a person’s mentally and emotionally stability. But if you’re an ignorant, amoral, evangelical whackjob, you think the ends justify the means. Golden Rule FAIL.
At the risk of overgeneralizing, men and women expect and desire to be treated differently. If an attractive young woman walks up to a man in a bar, takes a firm hold of his ass and tells him she wants to take him home for the night, some guys will immediately escort her home, some will politely refuse, but practically none will slap her across the face and charge her with sexual harassment. In contrast, if a man squeezes a strange woman’s butt in a bar and propositions her, most women will not take it well, no matter how much of a pretty boy he is. Put more simply, imagine someone actually using this logic: “I would love it if she pinned me down and had sex with me, so I’ll pin her down and have sex with her.” Golden Rule FAIL!
These unrepentant simpletons who call themselves evangelicals actually think something like ‘If I stopped believing in God, I would want religious people to try to save me from myself, so I better try to save this atheist.’ I never met an atheist who enjoyed listening to the nonsensical ramblings of a believer trying to bring him or her “back into the fold.” Consider the opposite logic: “I’m much happier now that I’ve rejected all this supernatural, talking-snake, wrath-of-god, pro-slavery, rape-condoning theist nonsense, so I should spend my days undermining the belief systems of happy (but ignorant) believers.” Foisting your ideology onto others because YOU think they need to hear it only serves to prove that you are as dumb as a sack of headless turkeys. Golden Rule FAIL!
Treating people as you would like to be treated is like ethics for toddlers – you wouldn’t like it if Jimmy bit you, so don’t bite him! It is a rudimentary understanding of empathy. It’s ethics for SPED class. Not everyone wants to be treated the same way. (Tangent: Some people might argue for restating the Golden Rule as “treat people as they wish to be treated,” but this is equally unsophisticated. Sometimes what’s best for someone (or for society) is not what he wants, as in the Crime example above.) The so-called Golden Rule is a nonsensical basis for ethical action. It’s moral fool’s gold.
Discrediting the Christian Core: The Ten Commandments as a Pathetic Basis for Morality
Tagged: ethics, list | 1 comment so far
Western society is plagued by obesity and general ill-health for many reasons: the raging incompetence of medical professionals; fitness snake-oil salesmen; belief in a variety of health-related myths; and desperate confusion about nutrition to name a few. Another serious problem is that people are generally confused about the meaning of exercise. Here are five non-exercises and their legitimate alternatives.
Unless we’re talking about hiking 40 km Read more »
Tagged: health, list | 3 comments
The War on Bullshit is proudly powered by WordPress